Are Crowd Wine Reviews Really as Reliable as They Seem?

A recent study from Cambridge University has stirred up debate by suggesting that crowdsourced wine reviews align with professional critics. Published in the Journal of Wine Economics, the findings highlight a 40% correlation between amateur ratings and expert assessments for Bordeaux reds from 2004 to 2016. But are crowd reviews really as reliable as they seem? Let’s dig into the details—and the demographics—behind these claims.

The Demographic Factor

Crowdsourced wine ratings are dominated by younger, tech-savvy drinkers who tend to prefer accessible, fruit-forward wines—“fruit bombs,” to be exact. These ratings often reflect immediate enjoyment rather than a deeper analysis of the wine’s complexity or aging potential.

Professional critics, by contrast, evaluate wines with a focus on balance, structure, and longevity—qualities that may not be apparent during a casual tasting. This divergence in perspective means that crowd reviews often skew toward “drinkability,” favoring wines that are easy to enjoy now but may lack the nuanced qualities prized by connoisseurs and collectors.

For example: ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ “The Kendall Jackson Chardonnay I picked up last night was very easy to drink and made me want to take a walk by the beach.”--Webb from Orlando

Correlation Isn’t Everything  

The Cambridge study revealed a 40% correlation between crowd ratings and professional critics like Jeff Leve and The Wine Advocate. While this might sound impressive, it’s worth noting that professional critics themselves align much more strongly, with an average correlation of 63%.  

One telling detail? The study found that Decanter, a publication known for its focus on fine, age-worthy wines, had the lowest correlation with crowd reviews at just 16%. This highlights a significant gap: casual drinkers and seasoned critics are often looking for very different things in a bottle of wine.  Take Decanter's Jeb Dunnuck versus. Webb from Orlando--these two are not going to be saying the same thing about that KJ Chard.  

Context Is Key  

Crowd reviews are often written in the moment—at a dinner party, a restaurant, or during a casual night at home. These reviews reflect immediate impressions and the wine’s “fun factor” rather than its full potential. A bold, fruity wine might score highly because it’s approachable and satisfying on the spot. But does that make it a truly exceptional wine? Not always.  

Professional critics, on the other hand, evaluate wines under controlled conditions, considering how the wine evolves in the glass and its potential to improve with age. Their assessments take into account both the present and future, providing a broader and more informed perspective.  

A Tool, Not a Substitute  

Crowd reviews can be a great resource for discovering wines to enjoy now, particularly for casual drinkers. But for those investing in cellar-worthy bottles or seeking truly exceptional wines, professional reviews remain essential.  

While the study highlights some alignment between amateurs and experts, it’s clear that crowd ratings serve a different purpose. They’re best used as a complement to traditional wine critique—not a replacement.  

So, whether you’re buying a bottle for a quiet evening or building a serious cellar with Kendall Jackson Chardonnay, keep the context—and the source—of the reviews in mind.